I am a leadership advisor to Fortune 500 CEOs and Boards, author of "Hacking Leadership" (Wiley) and "Leadership Matters" (2007), the Chairman at N2Growth, a member of the board of directors at the Gordian Institute and recognized by Thinkers50 as one of the top leadership thinkers globally. I am also a syndicated columnist and contributing editor on topics of leadership, innovation and problem solving. I have been married for nearly 30 years and am a proud father and grandfather.

The #1 Reason Leadership Development Fails

Over the years, I’ve observed just about every type of leadership development program on the planet. And the sad thing is, most of them don’t even come close to accomplishing what they were designed to do – build better leaders. In today’s column I’ll share the #1 reason leadership development programs fail, and give you 20 things to focus on to ensure yours doesn’t become another casualty.

According to the American Society of Training and Development, U.S. businesses spend more than $170 Billion dollars on leadership-based curriculum, with the majority of those dollars being spent on “Leadership Training.” Here’s the thing – when it comes to leadership, the training industry has been broken for years. You don’t train leaders you develop them – a subtle yet important distinction lost on many. Leadership training is alive and well, but it should have died long, long ago.

This may be heresy to some – but training is indeed the #1 reason leadership development fails. While training is often accepted as productive, it rarely is. The terms training and development have somehow become synonymous when they are clearly not. This is more than an argument based on semantics – it’s painfully real. I’ll likely take some heat over my allegations against the training industry’s negative impact on the development of leaders, and while this column works off some broad generalizations, in my experience having worked with literally thousands of leaders, they are largely true.

An Overview of The Problem My problem with training is it presumes the need for indoctrination on systems, processes and techniques. Moreover, training assumes that said systems, processes and techniques are the right way to do things. When a trainer refers to something as “best practices” you can with great certitude rest assured that’s not the case. Training focuses on best practices, while development focuses on next practices. Training is often a rote, one directional, one dimensional, one size fits all, authoritarian process that imposes static, outdated information on people. The majority of training takes place within a monologue (lecture/presentation) rather than a dialog. Perhaps worst of all, training usually occurs within a vacuum driven by past experience, not by future needs.

The Solution The solution to the leadership training problem is to scrap it in favor of development. Don’t train leaders, coach them, mentor them, disciple them, and develop them, but please don’t attempt to train them. Where training attempts to standardize by blending to a norm and acclimating to the status quo, development strives to call out the unique and differentiate by shattering the status quo. Training is something leaders dread and will try and avoid, whereas they will embrace and look forward to development. Development is nuanced, contextual, collaborative, fluid, and above all else, actionable.

The following 20 items point out some of the main differences between training and development:

1. Training blends to a norm – Development occurs beyond the norm.

2. Training focuses on technique/content/curriculum – Development focuses on people.

3. Training tests patience – Development tests courage.

4. Training focuses on the present – Development focuses on the future.

16. Training places people in a box – Development frees them from the box.

17. Training is mechanical – Development is intellectual.

18. Training focuses on the knowns – Development explores the unknowns.

19. Training places people in a comfort zone – Development moves people beyond their comfort zones.

20. Training is finite – Development is infinite.

If what you desire is a robotic, static thinker – train them. If you’re seeking innovative, critical thinkers – develop them. I have always said it is impossible to have an enterprise which is growing and evolving if leadership is not.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Good Mike: After so many received praise, it I only have ask you one last question safe you know answer for teaching of all. Which of these goals would prefer to define the liderazgo.1.-is the system that wants to develop all human faculties to transmit all the force that exists in our interior or 2.-system by which expert people exert a conductive action on those that have not yet reached the level of maturity required by today’s society. I hope your answer and with this I recall the debate that I failed. My most cordial greeting Mike

I’m not sure it’s fair to attempt to define something so complex by selecting from one of two definitions. Leadership combines elements of both, as well as many other aspects. Here’s my definition, although still not comprehensive enough: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2012/09/05/a-leadership-job-description

At the outset let me congratulate Mr.Myatt, for his wonderful contribution. Every single word, is thought provoking.

I believe, Training is more for skill development. And leadership is not a skill but an evolution as a whole. An internal change happening, which shapes his thoughts, reflected in words and deeds.

I guess, Leadership Development Program is mostly conducted by in-house trainers or out-sourced to a training company. In both the cases, the Facilitator in an attempt – though unintentionally – to establish his value, conducts the program with a methodology more apt for training.

Leadership nurturing can happen in a seminar, where some concepts of the speaker creates a spark within the participant, and effect a change. This is more spray and pray concept.

Leadership can be introduced through a workshop, where challenging activities and case studies being an instrument. But this can be futile, if not a proper, effective Need analysis – with both with the Client and participant – done.

But Leadership can mostly and easily be nurtured, on a long term contract with a client, like Consulting.

Hi Mike. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but starting an article with “I’ve observed just about every type of leadership development program on the planet” renders anything that follows as lacking any credibility. It’s rather like calling a US-based sporting event the “World Series”. I guess you’re writing for a generalist audience in the US, but please … there are many exceptionally good leadership development programmes that do not begin in any way with a ‘training’ premise.

Totally agree. The article “Locate Executives’ Weaknesses, Target Issues Precisely” should be the solution although it was intended for something a little different. http://www.theprincesynergy.com/newsinfoE_511_259.html.